Lalasab S/O Rajesab Budneshi vs State Of Karnataka on 9 December, 2009

I

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CiRCUIT BENCH AT DI-IARWAD

DATED THIS THE 9"' DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009

BEFORE

THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA_.s;wAiVI?j'*~   ~

CRIMINAL PETITION No_,aos2/2dd9-~ 1:    

BETWEEN:

1. Laiasab, S / 0. Rajesab Budneshi 
Age: 25 years, Occ: Agriculture  ~
R/0. Chikkalagundi V   = "
Tq. Biiagi, Dist. Bagalkm; L

2. Husen'a}5i,' Wk). Réi*;é'sab~ .BudI1eSVfiiV
Age: 50 years,'0 1s FILED U/S.-439 cR.R.c_'ET-5"ej'TiéiE

ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT.

RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN BILAGT._I=.s;-.c'RI1vI--E

No.88/2009 FOR THE ALLEGED OFREMES U'NDER.sEc'.323, " "

498(A), 341, 302, 3048 1pc BY AL-:LOW'lNCx '%THlS.__.:CRE1\_/l'Il\lAL
PETITION.     * ~ 

THIS PETITON coM1No"l_o'R.... FOR" oRoE'RVs0"«i:3--»IV1s =;DAY,= . "

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWILIG-:
'   ._ 
The petitioners   Section 439
Cr.P.C for release    of the deceased

Smt. Reshrfia   has" been converted into

compl'ai1dVt and'latheV:*.cas.e0"~.Vhas_' been registered in crime
No.88/2009 by  "The statement of the deceased

has alsov loeenurecordled 'by? the Executive Magistrate as dying

0.  vvTh0e."L:comf3lainant has stated that on 07.06.2009, at

*Vabout4'6..0'0&V  all the accused assaulted her alleging that she

0 0 0' lllhias not 'ofought money and gold as demanded by them. When

 llplleladed her parents inability to satisfy their demands, her

husband -- accused No.1, Mother--ir1--1aw we accused No.3 and

"\



DJ

accused No.4 have poured kerosene over her body

and thereby committed the offences. On hearing"A.the.cries 

hues of victim, the neighbours camev-and--extinguished theflfirep

and shifted her to Government   

thereafter she was shifted to Kuiiniareshveara 1-{ospital:,V"BagaIkoti"

for further treatment, where her....s:tatei'nent.iwassrecbrded by
PSI, Bilagi and case has  punishable
under Sections 3423,__49s+'A;'».--3§:1'."hf and Sec. 4 of
DOWTY   3'  4' " 0' .... is

3. :'i'h"e"   petitioner submits that
the fatheriof  dated 27.06.2009 to

the Bagalkotxpoliice   that while his deceased daughter

«was ceekihig, she Agotvattracted to the fire and she died and he

V.'-:;e'qLIie's--tedv._the:'po1ic_e to record the statement of the victim. The

 the injured has stated on 12.08.2009 that

'she toild  it that while she was preparing food, she got

 iiaettracseed  kerosene stove and died. The teamed Counsel

..cifui*therisubrnitted that earlier he approached this Court in Cr}.

i=>'."Nie.7757/2009 which came to be disposed of on 03.09.2009

4



rejecting the claim for hail of petitioners herein on the

that investigation is not completed. Now the investigiatiionciiiiis 

completed and charge sheet is fi1ed..ian»d' the prieseirice' the it

petitioners for the investigation is not re_duired~.a1:.d henfceidiie

submitted to grant bail to the peit_itiQnersj'- 

4. On the other hand, Pieader submits
that in her statement made and also in
her dying declaration onithie'  «tivasiirecorded by the

Executive MagistrateV__in 'th'e__pr.ese_noe of doctor who treated the

injured,V'shie"    herihusiband, parent--in--1aws and
grand mother have«'.'iCiornrnit-teic§_. the offences. In view of the

dying deciaration, Vit'isiie,1ieariii that the petitioners are cause for

 the __the dé:ee.a..sed. Crime has been registered under

   and 498--A. In View of the heinous crime

coriirriitttedidfxj  deceased, the benefit of bail under Section

'439 cannot  granted to the petitioner.

it  I have heard the arguments made by both the parties

'  gone through the records.





6. In respect of the complaint madeflaga-inistii 

petitioners, presumption is drawn against -thewpetitionefr. as

they are the cause for the death of  de_ceased--. _:i'Death'

place within seven years from th.q;°d.ate of' :narriage."'i._;A'slong as* V

the same has not been rebutted._ by', the "'pe,titi.dner, law
presumes that the petitioners  who cause for
the death. Hence_eth_e  who is
the husbandhof   respect of the 2nd
 aged about 50 years, it
is stated' in  the petitioner No.2] accused
No.3 caught._,ho.ldthe  help the accused No.1 and 4

and accused N012 "who set fire. In View of the statement, the

  also not entitled for the baii, but since she is

aged: ab0.uit_i 5:0-.,.vyears, showing only concession towards

it  petiti~oner_.'i'\TQ.$;',iiI grant bail to petitioner No.2. Accordingly, i

 '"x__iip'ass the fcilowingz

ORDER